Printable View
How does your sideboard look right now and how do you board against Miracles?Quote:
Originally Posted by Koke_MTG
Right now I bring in 2x Gideon, 2x Council's Judgment, 1x Prelate, 1x Sword of War and Peace. I board out 4x Swords to Plowshares and 2x Mother of Runes. Taking out all STP makes losing to Mentor a real possibility and I'm seriously considering going up to 3x Council's Judgment in my sideboard just for this stupid matchup.
This is the last version I'm testing and with which I am very happy:Quote:
Originally Posted by NeckBird
https://serving.photos.photobox.com/...8cf232e61f.jpg
The list has a ton of solutions against a deck like Miracles, maybe a bit more than normal IDK... But I'm prone to play these kinds of lists, I suppose due to my play style. But anyway, I think the MU is good apart from this concrete list.
Usually my plan against them is:
+1 x Oblivion Ring
+2 x Council's Judgment
+2 x Cataclysm
+1 x Palace Jailer
+1 x Sanctum Prelate
-1 x Mother of Runes
-1 x Phyrexian Revoker
-1 x Mirran Crusader
-3 x Swords to Plowshares
-1 x Umezawa's Jitte
This is the standard I use, but for example against a Mentor heavy version, like Daze one, I use to keep in another Swords to Plowshares. The singleton I'm keeping in is, apart to an efficient answer to Monastery Mentor, to secure the crown when needed against flasy creatures at instant speed. I'm happy spending a slot there in exchange of more semi-free wins with Palace Jailer mechanic.
On the other hand, I think to beat Miracles Cataclysm is generally better doing the function you're looking for than Gideon and SoWaP IMO. Let's say that Gideon is good most of the times maintaining his value quite high, it's fine, while Cataclysm in the right moment is gonna win you the game on the spot played correctly, it's quite absurd. It's exactly what I want here, a game-shaker that changes the dynamic of the game. SoWaP I think is worse because, although the protection is quite valuable, you're not attacking your opponent from other angles which are the best things about the others, they give you inevitability, and also SoWaP is easier to remove.
In addition, I've tested 3 x Council's Judgment versions of the deck, it's not crazyness. It's, by far, the card you board in the most. According to my SB plans I think I always bring them in except against Storm and Dredge, not sure if I'm leaving something more...
Burn, infect, lands, elves. It is the card you board in the most, but it's also a card you tend to want to see one copy of and no more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koke_MTG
Palace Jailer can be a trap vs Miracles. Bad Miracles players lose to it, but a good one will just get the Monarch and run away with the game. I love Jailer, bit I‘d board him out versus decent players.
RiP is still worthwhile against Grixis Control. While the card itself doesn't technically do anything immediate to the board state, it dramatically lowers or negates the value of subsequent K. Commands, Snapcasters, and Anglers.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeckBird
It's not nearly as good against Miracles, however. Trading one card for shutting off Snapcaster is not great, and even adding AK to the mix it's not really strong enough to justify it. Surgical Extraction is actually better here since it can also potentially knock cards out of hand and effectively counter second-or-later Terminus, but it's still kinda marginal.
Grixis is unfavorable if they get going, but they're not unwinnable by any stretch. We also get a lot of non-game wins these days when the mana-denial part of our deck just does its thing. This match is fairly close to 50-50 these days. It just feels bad since the games that go longer and more unpleasantly are most memorable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marungo
Miracles also isn't nearly so bad, especially if you have 2-3 Brightling and/or Cataclysm in your 75.
I like a lot of what I see here, even if I'm not as high on Palace Jailer. With 2 each Brightling, Cataclysm, and Prelate, this deck looks very well suited to fight Miracles. My only concern is that it might be a bit softer to some of the black decks out there, but it's not weak by any stretch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koke_MTG
I tend to agree with keeping in 1-2 StP against Mentor or Priest (which can deny Recruiter value, and is worth answering). Jailer just increases the utility there. I also tend to like SoWaP, but you're right that it's not as powerful as the alternatives against Miracles. It's more useful in that it has value against many other decks, especially the mirror.
While I don't quite bring in CJ that much, it is definitely one of my top SB cards. In fact, in my scoring table, it often rates higher than many main-deck mainstays. I also agree that the 3rd isn't crazy, but I've also decided Ob. Ring is good in 80% of the same situations and is a great card to have against SnT decks. I think I'd play a copy of that before the 3rd CJ, which you appear to also be doing.
Hi @ll,
What do you guys think about the Grixis Control matchup? I played some matches against a friend of mine and it felt pretty unwinnable. Grixis Control almost always managed to recover from early hatebears and closed the games with JTMS. And even after sideboarding where I bring in things like RIP, Canonist, Disenchant, Relic-Warder, Gideon the matchup doesn´t feel better (even more creature hate from Grixis). Hard mana denial plan with early Wastelands could steal me one or two games but that’s it.
I played this list
https://www.mtggoldfish.com/deck/1213698#online
with 2 Brightlings instead of Serra Avenger and Disenchant instead of Benalish Marshal
Any thoughts about the matchup?
I’m not looking to get in an argument. All I’ll say is that if you believe miracles to be anything better than unfavorable, you are probably playing against bad miracles players.
I've taken Koke's advice and built my sideboard to beat Miracles and Grixis Control. I now have 2 Cataclysm, 1 Gideon, AoZ, and I went up to 3 Council's Judgment. I haven't played against Grixis Control much, but I assume that that sideboard version will be good against it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Black_Diamond
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black_Diamond
First thing first: while I disagree with some specific card selections, your deck list looks fine, overall.
As for Grixis Control itself, the matchup isn't actually that bad, but it is overall slightly unfavorable. It is certainly much better than Czech Pile was. Your specific build may have a bit more trouble, though. While I am a huge fan of Brightling, it is at its worst versus Strix decks. Prior to the DRS ban, I used to run 3 Crusaders to crush Pile. This is probably overkill now, but more Crusaders definitely help.
It is important to understand the dynamics of this match. You are going to win a percentage of uncontested wins just by hitting them with a stream of mana denial early. That is the best path to victory, if it is available.
If it is not, and both sides have comparable draws, it turns into a long and grindy game where they slowly amass card advantage. There is no card that just wins, but the accumulated advantage eventually becomes overwhelming. You have to look for ways to beat that. If you can get a Mother of Runes to stick, that often just does it--they run very few effects to unconditionally and economically remove it. Do beware of Toxic Deluge, though. Karakas plus Thalia is also excellent, attacking safely into any blocker other than Angler while making removal and cantrips harder. Do not rely on your equipment, but get it and get value ASAP if you have an opening to do so. Vials are handy, but also inconsistent--try to get Wisp value anyway with SFM and Recruiter if you can. The most important PW they have is actually not JtMS but LtLH--this is your primary Revoker target, but have a plan to handle the removal that will come it's way.
Your sideboards are both very powerful, but you must be careful not to overboard. Disenchants and LRW are not where you want to be unless you expect upwards of three high-impact cards (Dread, Needle, Rod). Your RiP are great though, answering a lot of their potential economy provided by Command and Snapcaster, plus making it hard to cast Anglers. CJ is a robust and flexible answers to their permanents. Gideon can turn a slightly behind board into a definitively winning one. There are other cards that you can have in the board like an extra Crusader, Lightcaster, or Cataclysm which are also high impact. A spare Recruiter can be good if you have it. Your weaker cards are those which are too conditional on vulnerable synergies and easily removed--this is one match where Flickerwisp is weaker, as is Revoker. StP is also not great, as it trades without their creatures mostly at card disadvantage. For their part, expect them to bring in some generic anti-swarm cards like Deluge and Casualties, anti-ability effects like Needle, maybe another LtLH, and potentially some specialized anti-DnT tools like Dread of Night, while dropping a lot of countermagic. Use this to your advantage: spells in hand are vulnerable, but those on the stack are less so.
In summary: this match is very close, and small differences in your build as well as play technique matter a lot. It is a match that needs a lot of practice to really get comfortable with, and demands a lot of you mentally. Don't give up on it, do practice it.
Reading over the last few bits, I think you actually quite enjoy looking for arguments.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marungo
I do happen to agree with the substance of your post, though probably to a lesser degree than you meant it. The matchup ranges from “significantly unfavorable” to “better than a coin flip,” depending heavily on the specific configurations used. DnT decks with Brightling, Cataclysm, and SoWaP do significantly better than those without them. The same is true for Miracles builds with EE. This is also a match where experience matters a lot. Without knowing the specific configurations and assuming competent pilots of similar skill, I tend to think of it as mildly unfavorable: I expect the DnT player to win an average of 40-45% of their matches versus Miracles.
Well ya got me there. I am one who does like a nice debate or argument, particularly on a subject that is up for debate or something I feel is interesting. But in this case I really was looking to avoid one since people seem to feel strongly on this subject, myself included. I would say that playing against players of very solid caliber I believe it to be 40%. I don’t think it’s good and despite our best efforts and trying to get cute playing snow-covered plains, we aren’t likely to make it favorable. All in all though I really liked your response. Quite detailed and covered a lot of the ideas that I think summarizes the matchup and different deck decisions that play a role in said matchup.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Darkview
Lots of DnT at the Legacy Classic in Top 8:
4th Paden Pilgrim
5th James Otto
6th Travis Brown
7th Justin Herrell
1-2 Brightling in 3 decks, Grand Abolisher(!) in Travis Brown's deck. Everyone had 1-2 Mirran Crusader.
Otherwise, some strays (Resourceful Cleric in one, SotL in another, 3 Revokers in two decks). Sideboards were all pretty standard cards we have discussed.
I'd love to hear how peoples events played out, if any of you are on here.
I think the real next level strat is playing 23 lands, you get another palace jailer and never concede monarach, then cuz of less lands the extra draws wont be flooding us. I think it improves the match up several percentage points from my extensive testing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marungo
Statistically it doesn't change much.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigFatJiJi
If you really want better draws in the long game, go for the red splash and play some fetches :)
If you had room to play either Ballista or SoWaP in your sb, which would you choose? Defend your answer. Assume that the most important factor in determining which card is better is its performance in the mirror.
The Sword, clearly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Medea_
Protection from red is a thing (lots of Bolt, K-command, P-Fire in this new meta).
Protection from white is great in the mirror and against Miracles or Blade decks.
It goes well with a mana denial strategy (Port & Wasteland, or even better : Magus of the moon if you play the red splash, which I do)
Plus Walking Ballista is more easily removed since it is a creature. It is also weak to Pithing Needle / Sorcerous spyglass, and any flicker effect (hello Flickerwisp)
I a even currently trying it maindeck in place of the other sword, and I am very happy with it.
Has anybody tried Nahiri the lithomancer in the sideboard for this deck? I saw it played in stoneblade, but since this is also a stoneforge deck, could a copy work here too?
Matchups where either has considerable added value:Quote:
Originally Posted by Medea_
SoWaP: Mirror, burn, maverick, stoneblade, lands, loam, miracles, grixis control, (omni)show, patriot, goblins
Ballista: Mirror, infect, maverick, elves, dredge, mediocre against eldrazi or miracles
So, in terms of general viability, sword obviously wins out, both diversity-wise and in the current metagame.
But you say the most important factor for this choice is its performance in the mirror. Well, Sword is a card supposed to prevent interaction, while ballista is supposed to be a versatile, tutorable piece of removal. To put it bluntly: SoWaP is a true-name nemesis, while ballista is a kolaghan's command. They're both great, but impossible to compare in a vacuum. It depends on how you like to approach the match-up, what other cards you can bring in and take out. I think the choice rests mostly on this question of where you find yourself the weakest: sealing the game or breaking the grind. What do you want that final sb card to be good at?
For instance, SoWaP with crusader is obviously an insane combination if it rolls out without forced farm labor shenanigans. If you pack 2-3 crusader and you're not taking them out for the mirror, the sword fits much better in your deck than when you play 3-4 revoker and plan to bring in Gideon and an extra recruiter.
I would classify mirror games in two phases:Quote:
Originally Posted by Medea_
* 1) Jitte Race. An early Jitte can instantly end the game, so if someone has an early Jitte, the other player needs to blank it somehow.
* 2) Lategame Midrangefest. Later, both players are locked out of Jitte counters somehow, and the board becomes complicated, so someone has to go over the top.
Walking Ballista helps in the first phase of the game, because if you have the early Jitte, you can pop the common ways someone can defend against your Jitte (Mom, Thalia, Revoker). If your opponent has the early Jitte, it buys you a turn I guess, because it can block and kill itself? Not great, but not nothing. Walking Ballista helps a lot in the late phase of the game because it can go absurdly over the top, being an unending mana sink into a colorless creature and letting you buy Jitte counters without having to earn them in combat.
Sword of War and Peace is mostly irrelevant in the first phase of the game; if you have the Jitte you just play it and if your opponent has the Jitte you are unlikely to ever get your sword to stick because all your things are dead. Sword does help you go over the top in the late phase of the game, making normal beaters into unstoppable killing machines, but probably not as much as Ballista does? I mean a Mirran Crusader with a SoWaP is pretty far over the top.
So I guess if you only care about the mirror, I like Ballista better: it's occasionally relevant in the Jitte race and it seems like a somewhat better over-the-top late game play.
--
SoWaP is coming in for like, more than half of my matches though to make me into a pseudo-combo-aggro-deck, where Ballista definitely wouldn't, so I don't get why you say the mirror is the important consideration? The main argument for SoWaP that was convincing to me was that it is great against random combo decks where you just need the strongest clock you can find.
I answered you on Discord, but I thought I might respond a bit more methodically here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Medea_
When evaluating those two cards only for their performance in the DnT mirror (and ignoring all other concerns and factors), I feel the Ballista is superior to the Sword.
We need to be very clear about what each of these cards do. Sword is a card designed to end the game quickly. The equipped creature is nearly impossible to block, remove, or otherwise forstall, and the damage it does increases significantly. However, various tricks can be used to indirectly hamper the Sword because it, unlike the creature holding it, is targetable. As with any other equipment, tempo-plays such as removing the creature with the equip activation on the stack, or Vialing in Flickerwisps or Leonin Relic-Warder mid-combat can not only negate the Sword but also put the creature it was equipped to in an unexpectedly vulnerable position. The Sword will probably win given long enough, but a prepared opponent can buy themselves a lot of time to find a more lasting answer.
In contrast, the Ballista serves a different purpose: board dominance. A Ballista can remove many key creatures on its own: Mother of Runes, Revokers, Flickerwisps, and Recruiters all fall to it. While it is more easily removed than the Sword, it has guaranteed impact: it can still kill several creatures in response to the Flickerwisp trigger that would kill it. This is very significant in the late game: a topdecked Ballista is more likely to break open the position than almost any other possible card, irrespective of the opponent’s answer (the only countermeasure that actually works, Revoker, would be equally effective on Sword). Finally, having a body is relevant in the most mundane way: it can still pick up equipment and start swinging.
If you’re unconvinced, I have a familiar comparison to make: would you prefer an active Jitte, or an active Sword? Because the effect Ballista counters have on the mirror look a lot like the effect of Jitte counters, and we know pretty well what that amounts to.
Most things have been said before and i agree with Mad Mat and Lord Darkview. I just want to add that the sword helps to finnish a game that we are ahead or tied in board but Ballista beside that can also help to win a game that you are behind where sword wouldn't.
I honestly don't understand Sword of War and Peace. I would definitely play Walking Ballista as it doubles as an early removal against Elves, is a threat that lives under Dread of Night and can also clode out a game in the mirror match or against Elves for instance. It's a good card in the opening hand and a good topdeck or target for Recruiter.
Sword of War and Peace doesn't really do anything relevant except turning one of your creatures into another Batterskull basically. And given this, I'd play either Walking Ballista or Manriki Gusari. Manriki Gusari is more lean and also helps to shut off Jitte and would also cleanly answer your beloved SoWaP. It also synergizes extremely well with Serra Avenger and turns some of out shitters into useful blockers against Eldrazi (and also helps to deal with their Jittes so you can dedicate your Revokers to Endbringer and Ballista).
Protection from red and white is extremely relevant in a lot of matchups.
"Another batterskull". It's good enough for the maindeck, 2 seem good. Life gain is relevant in some matchups as well.
I guess the thing about the Mirror is right, Ballista is a house and good early and late. What I dont like is calling out cards beeing good against Elves. This MU is just so freakin bad that it doesnt realy matter what youre playing in 75-80% or even more you will lose. Yeah ok maybe if you play 4 Chalice etc in your sideboard. Sword is always pretty good in clocking combo players like Storm/SaS and so on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adan
Quick article recapping some of the cool stuff people have put out in the last week: http://www.thrabenuniversity.com/?p=1969
Marcio is obviously a significantly better player than me, but I disagree with so many of his sidebord choices. For example, against Lands he only boards out 1 Thalia and I board out all 4. I’d much rather have Revoker in the matchup for Mox Diamond and Molten Vortex. He doesn’t even bring in Path to Exile or leave in many STP for Tireless Tracker let alone Marit Lage. Just goes to show how deep the deck is with such different sideboarding philosophies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Medea_
No Death & Taxes in the top 16 in GP Richmond :/
I’ve spent some time considering the possibility of a Tutor-focused SB for DnT. Usually these fail to impress for many reasons: poor selection of artifacts/enchantments, going too little or too deep on the idea, or just that the mere possibility of card disadvantage is crushing. However, in a metagame such as this one, the right tutor target can simply end a large share of games.
I set about considering a 15-card SB that would suit most 60-card configurations. This began by listing out every high-impact artifact or white enchantment I could think of, narrowing the traditional SB to its mainstay components, adding 2-3 Tutors, and filling out the list with what I deemed the best choices in the current environment. This is what I came up with:
1 Path to Exile
1 Ethersworn Canonist
1 Containment Priest
2 Rest in Peace
2 Council’s Judgment
1 Sanctum Prelate
2 Enlightened Tutor
1 Absolute Grace
1 Mark of Asylum
1 Oblivion Ring
1 Pithing Needle
1 Act of Authority
All the cards above Enlightened Tutor are almost a stock standard. However, the SB contains five subsequent “silver bullets:” Absolute Grace turns off all targeted black removal and makes their creatures much less intimidating. Mark of Asylum does the same for red and many colorless sources of removal, like Walking Ballista and Kozilek’s Return. Oblivion Ring is a catch-all answer to anything other than problematic lands, TNN, and Progenitus. Many other problems are answered by Pithing Needle. Act of Authority grinds out mirrors, Enchantress, Red Prison, and similar decks in combination with Flickerwisp, while also providing an answer to multiple Dread of Night in a single card. In addition, the tutor can find a Vial , equipment, or Revoker from the typical 60, plus the stock Canonist and RiP in the SB.
The tradeoff is that losing a PtE will make the deck a bit softer to tempo and reanimator, but DnT is fairly strong against those decks regardless, and may gain from the ability to effectively blank opposing removal without equipment or by running more virtual RiP. Additionally, the loss of 4-mana haymakers like Cataclysm and Gideon against control strategies may make those matchups a bit tougher where the SB doesn’t compensate; Grace and Act help beat Grixis and Moon strategies, but the best card against Miracles to tutor is Vial which is not necessarily game-ending. Finally, relying on singletons and Tutors makes the deck more vulnerable to countermagic, even though that is decreasing in popularity. Miracles would be especially challenging, with access to both JtMS and Predict.
Despite these disadvantages, I think the Tutor-board is worth another look. Many decks in the metagame fail to beat a single well-selected enchantment, and that fact is ripe for exploitation.
I really like this angle. I have been trying the Enlightened Tutor in my SB and though not as heavy with silver bullets are you pointed, I was satisfied with the array of options it gave me. My local meta is a little down in storm-based combos and I see many Lightning Bolts, thus instead of Absolute Grace, I have been using Absolute Law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Darkview
Going forward, with the meta going heavier on black, or even for more flexibility, I may try to use something like this:
1 Enlightened Tutor
1 Absolute Grace
1 Absolute Law
1 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Rest in Peace
1 Surgical Extraction/Faerie Macabre
2 Council's Judgment
1 Leonin Relic-Warder
1 SoWP
1 Sanctum Prelate
1-2 PW/Cataclysm
1-2 PtE
I think doing so well the PT was pretty bad for the archetype. Everyone is coming to big events prepared to play and beat Thalia. And when people want to beat DnT, they beat DnT. The deck is fragile to hate and is less consistent at beating its hate when it can't reliably cantrip to answers or alternative threats like Gideon. DnT is a great deck when it's not a 'good deck', and when it's a 'great deck', it's a terrible deck.Quote:
Originally Posted by potentia
While it is nice that fast combo appears basically dead in paper magic, a meta of t1-fetch-a-basic, TNN, Snapcaster+Kolaghan's Command, nu-Lili and 10,000 sideboard Dread of Nights is going to be an unfriendly world for vanilla DnT. I was considering playing rainbow-Humans at the GP (which is not there, but almost there as a deck, I'm sure a good 75 exists), but just skipped the event in the end. It's weird to be in this spot so soon after it won a PT and DRS was banned, and it's still a fine deck for beating random jank, but it feels like it went from being a deck that preyed on tier 1 decks to a deck that gets preyed on by tier 1 decks. IMO the archetype needs to evolve considerably to get to a place where it can win in a 'the most popular deck plays 3 Dread of Night' meta. (Or it just needs to keep doing poorly until people stop considering it tier 1.)
Regardless I wanted to thank iatee. I haven’t played legacy in two months and wanted to play the splash variant and got a list and advice from you. It helped a lot and I went 5-3 losing my win-and-in for day two. Overall if I had known how to play the shadow matchup better I could’ve easily gone 6-2 or 7-1. But live and learn. For anyone curious i beat:Quote:
Originally Posted by iatee
BUG Delver (2-0)
Shardless BUG (2-1)
Infect (2-0)
Miracles (2-1)
Mono white DNT (2-0)
And lost to:
Deaths shadow (1-2)
Deaths shadow (1-2)
Humans (Cedric Phillips) (1-2)
I got 59th at the GP. Mono-white seems very well positioned against everything except for Grixis Control. That one is still a problem matchup, even with DRS gone. Longer post or a video debrief will come later, but here's the decklist for now. I would not change a single card if I played in an event tomorrow.
4 Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
2 Phyrexian Revoker
2 Recruiter of the Guard
3 Mirran Crusader
7 Snow-Covered Plains
7 Plains
2 Karakas
4 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Aether Vial
4 Flickerwisp
4 Mother of Runes
1 Sanctum Prelate
1 Palace Jailer
4 Stoneforge Mystic
1 Batterskull
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte
1 Faerie Macabre
1 Walking Ballista
2 Gideon, Ally of Zendikar
1 Recruiter of the Guard
1 Surgical Extraction
2 Rest in Peace
2 Chalice of the Void
2 Path to Exile
1 Leonin Relic-Warder
2 Council's Judgment
chalice?? =/Quote:
Originally Posted by Medea_
I finished 129th at the GP. Day two may have taken a different trajectory if I didn't punt game one against Lands, but it was great to just play 15 rounds of magic against a varied field.
Here's an interesting play that I got wrong. Game two against SnT, I'm on the play and open with a hand of 2 Plains, Waste, Port, Thalia, Relic Warder, and Jailer. Play a plains and pass. Opponent goes Tomb, Petal, Show and Tell. What do you put in play? I chose Jailer reasoning that the hand loses to Griselbrand or Emrakul, and there's 8 of those against 2-3 Omniscience. And if it they play, Sneak Attack, I can still jam the Relic Warder on my turn. My opponent went Omniscience into Emrakul and Griselbrand. Oops.
R1 : 2-0 vs Grixis Delver
R2 : 0-2 vs Show and Tell
R3 : 2-1 vs Academy Rector Nic fit
R4 : 2-1 vs Eldrazi
R5 : 2-1 vs Grixis Control
R6 : 2-0 vs Aluren
R7 : 2-0 vs UB Death Shadow
R8 : 1-2 vs Grixis Control (BBD)
R9 : 2-1 vs DnT
R10 : 1-2 vs Lands
R11 : 2-0 vs DnT
R12 : 1-2 vs Humans (Cedric Phillops)
R13 : 1-2 vs RB Reanimator
R14 : 1-2 vs Punishing Maverick
R15 : 2-0 vs BW Deadguy Ale
Mainboard :
4 Mom
4 Thalia Guardian of Thraben
4 Flickerwisp
4 Stoneforge Mystic
3 Phryexian Revoker
2 Recruiter of the Guard
2 Mirran Crusader
1 Serra Avenger
1 Palace Jailer
1 Sanctum Prelate
4 Aether Vial
4 Swords to Plowshares
1 Batterskull
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Jitte
12 Plains
4 Wasteland
4 Port
3 Karakas
Sideboard
2 Gideon Ally of Zendikar
2 Council's Judgment
2 Ethersworn Canonist
2 Path to Exile
2 Rest in Peace
1 Surgical Extraction
1 Containment Priest
1 Pithing Needle
1 Leonin Relic Warder
1 Walking Ballista
Hey guys,
Nice job anyways. I was following standings from time to time watching how you as D&T players were performing.
What Iatee says is completely true sadly. We are not so comfortable bringing tier 1 flag specially to big events cause our incapacity to dodge hate cards in natural way and in a large amount of rounds as a GP is. Besides the difficulty of Grixis Control performing fine day 2.
@AntiquatedNotion I think you made the more reasonable play. Before I ended up reading I was thinking that I'd have root for Palace Jailer there. Sometimes you've to go all in and that means taking risks. Maybe you go with Leonin Relic-Warder and he end up Pyroclasm'ing you and crushing anyways. Palace Jailer had more options to be "the card" and also let you in a better position for the rest of the game. He really drew the nuts there and would have crushed you in almost every scenario, nothing to reproach there.
So finally Brightling is a flop? :)
He explains some of his reasoning here. I think it's a valid choice, depending on your deck configuration and expected meta.Quote:
Originally Posted by miguel veloso
Good showing in the event. Some of those late matchups were difficult. FWIW, I don't think your play versus SnS was an error, for precisely the reasons that Koke_MTG expressed.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiquatedNotion
I think that all of this is fair, though I also think that DnT is still finely positioned. The sign of a healthy meta is that no deck is the best deck for more than a week after its coronation. I'm already seeing a decline in the population of super-specific hate cards like Dread of Night.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koke_MTG
Grixis Control is probably here to stay for a while, though. That is something we may have to adapt to.
Uh... no. Like all cards, it is situational. Brightling happens to be great versus red decks and Miracles, which is why it was great for the first month and a half post-ban. It just happens to be worse than Crusader against black decks (especially Strix), and those decks are currently ascendant. For all we know, in another month the meta may shift again and Brightling could be worth two MB slots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tylert
A biblical verse comes to mind for all of these card-specific questions (hate cards, beater slots, and so on).
Ecclesiastes 3:1. To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.
Clearly, the message was about choosing the proper deck and flex slots for your metagame. If not intended, still applicable.
I'd make the play all over again if given a chance. Just a tough break. My friends were arguing for the Relic Warder play, but I wonder how much of that stance is influenced by the actual results.
I put in the Relic-Warder 100% of the time in that situation, I don't think it's even a close call. If they know they're playing against DnT, SnS players are rarely gonna go for a high risk line that straight up loses to Karakas like putting in Emrakul. And if it's Griselbrand, PJ is better, but you're not even certain to win if they draw a decent 14.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiquatedNotion
DnT's clock is slow enough that SnS can just durdle for a few turns until they set up the Snt->Omni or a Sneak, and that's their post-board game plan. We all can agree that SnS players are the lowest form of human life, but you still have to give them enough credit to assume they'll make somewhat rational decisions, and losing to Karakas for no reason isn't one.
Far more interesting: ZERO Ethersworn Canonist.Quote:
Originally Posted by miguel veloso
@everyone
Any feels on Cataclysm vs. Gideon in the Grixis Control match?
The risk is not that high. D&T plays only 3 karakas. And Karakas only really ruins the show and ape game if they drop Emrakul.Quote:
Originally Posted by iatee
It depends on the amount of mana they start out with and how sustainable it is. If their hand is quite vulnerable to mana denial, they're much more likely to go off and hope the opponent does not have karakas. Karakas doesn't ruin the game that much for them if they can drop Griselbrand, too, as they still get to draw a bunch of cards and you're a turn behind.Quote:
DnT's clock is slow enough that SnS can just durdle for a few turns until they set up the Snt->Omni or a Sneak, and that's their post-board game plan. We all can agree that SnS players are the lowest form of human life, but you still have to give them enough credit to assume they'll make somewhat rational decisions, and losing to Karakas for no reason isn't one.
But, most importantly, I think it's a very fair bet that a turn 1 Omniscience is very unlikely to be beatable by a LRW. Your clock is still quite slow and you've given them many more outs to still resolve that omniscience.
So I'd say Jailer is the best call overall. It ruins a fast Emrakul if you don't have Karakas and it's probably the best thing to drop against Griselbrand next to revoker, drawing you a minimum of two extra cards. Revoker stops their card advantage, but requires you to still deal with a 7/7 flying lifelinker.